torekp comments on Quotes and Notes on Scott Aaronson’s "The Ghost in the Quantum Turing Machine" - Less Wrong

16 Post author: shminux 17 June 2013 05:11AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (82)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: torekp 22 June 2013 07:02:42PM 2 points [-]

In the paper you also wrote

With the brain, by contrast, it’s not nearly so obvious that the “Knightian indeterminism source” can be physically swapped out for a different one, without destroying or radically altering the brain’s cognitive functions as well.

But given the relatively large amplitude of the microscopic thermal noise that CellBioGuy points to, what evolutionary reason would favor a strong role for quantum freebits? After all, thermal noise is far beyond the comprehension of any rival or predator organism. So the organism is safe from being too predictable, even if it harnesses only probabilistic randomization sources. Or it might amplify both types of randomness, thermal noise and quantum freebits alike. But in that case I'd expect the thermal noise to dominate the cognitive and behavioral results, just because thermal noise is so richly available.

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 22 April 2014 11:00:55AM *  1 point [-]

My thoughts exactly. Real randomness and sufficiently advanced pseudo randomness would be equally good for practical purposes, all other things being equal, but it might well have been easier to tap into noise than evolve a PRNG. So we may have ended up with incompatibilist FW by a kind if accident.